How long before vinegar lowers nitrates?

[jda]

While it might reduce other parameters, changing water cannot really reduce phosphates since the vast majority of it is bound to rock/sand and not in the water column. If you do change some water, a bit will unbind from the rock and sand to right back up to where you were. Water changes are good for a lot of things and even lowering nitrate, but phosphate changes are not one of them.

 

[TWYOUNG]

Only organic carbon is added without other elemental nutrients, nutrients which are constantly removed by the skimmer as part of the organic waste. What guarantee is there that sufficient elemental substances are supplied so that the growth you are aiming for with dosing can actually take place?
Why usable nitrate-nitrogen is able to build up in a well lit aquarium? Nitrate-nitrogen is exported constantly by normal natural de-nitrification. Something is limiting growth and it is not nitrogen, organic carbon or light. Why do you suspect very fast growers will be able to restore the nutrient balance? They will not!

Nitrate is a safely stored and usable nitrogen source. Once the nitrification capacity is build off by dosing or removed by overdosing, then only correct dosing may prevent ammonia build up.

Supporting growth of very fast growers , able to use ammonia-nitrogen only, with free unlimited organic carbon supply, what happens to all slower growing organisms responsible for keeping the balance before dosing was started, in competition for the same amount of essential nutrients? ( Most fast growing bacteria are not able to use nitrate-nitrogen because they do not have the enzymes. They are very small and the life cycle is short , are not skimmed easily, needing a constant supply of organic carbon to keep the growth- cycle going. Heterotrophic bacteria able to use nitrate for growth do prefer ammonia as a nitrogen source and consume a lot more organic carbon to produce the energy needed for transforming nitrate into usable ammonia, slowing down growth rates, allowing competition for available nutrients using the same nitrogen source , allowing natural import of organic carbon for increasing the C/N ratio of feed, reducing the need for nitrification. Organismns using nitrate are not able to compete with bacteria using ammonia. )

How much is the daily nitrogen overproduction on which the daily dose of carbohydrates can be based? How much may be dosed daily without any risk for overdosing? How to build off dosing after overdosing without removing support for the carrying capacity? If one is not able to answer these questions one should not start with adding vinegar or an other carbohydrate. Dosing vinegar based on the nitrate level does NOT prevent overdosing,

Since a safe daily dose does not exist but the daily ammonia production ( ammonia available for nitrification) and not nitrate levels may be used as a more realistic parameter, how do you know you are not adding too much? By redistributing the available nutrients maybe those slow growing organisms normally consuming nitrate are not able to do so, even when nitrate is not produced anymore, the nitrate level may not decend as suspected. What are you going to do if the nitrate level does not decend as suspected? Increase the dose? How the max dose will be determined?
It has been shown adding carbohydrates is not reef safe due to uncontrollable redistribution of nutrients, also taking place in the coral holobiont.

What is the risk in the presence of nitrate compared to the risk one takes by adding carbohydrates, especially if one does not have the correct information needed to determine a safe daily dose.

Very eloquent response and somewhat beyond my understanding. This seems to be an indictment of carbon dosing in all it's forms, vinegar, vodka, NoPox. No only do you claim it to be ineffective you state it is unsafe. Considering this practice is widespread in the hobby I'd love for someone more knowledgeable than I to comment, Randy Holmes-Farley!

 

[TWYOUNG]

While it might reduce other parameters, changing water cannot really reduce phosphates since the vast majority of it is bound to rock/sand and not in the water column. If you do change some water, a bit will unbind from the rock and sand to right back up to where you were. Water changes are good for a lot of things and even lowering nitrate, but phosphate changes are not one of them.

When my tank was new I was told the reason I had to dose so much phosphate was bc my rock was soaking it up. Now I'm told it's releasing it into the water column. If phosphate has the ability to move in and out of the substrate and find it's own equilibrium, what use is it to try to control it through water changes, carbon dosing, GFO?

 

[TWYOUNG]

I think 30 to 24 is significant. 20% drop sounds good. Is there a number you are trying to reach?

10 seems to be the number I hear most widely recommended, although many aim lower. Personally I was thinking 20 for an upper limit. Of course I'll hear from the, "don't chase numbers" people who I guess are fine with >100. It would seem there has to be some cutoff as to how high one should be willing to go.

 

[Nano_Man]

If everything looks good and is thriving why change anything every tank runs different. If it not broken don’t fix it . Do your water changes as a routine. If you live next to the sea nsw is best and free . Good luck on your journey

 

[dwest]

10 seems to be the number I hear most widely recommended, although many aim lower. Personally I was thinking 20 for an upper limit. Of course I'll hear from the, "don't chase numbers" people who I guess are fine with >100. It would seem there has to be some cutoff as to how high one should be willing to go.

10 is good. Although you are in 20’s which I think is fine. I’m in the 30’s and 40’s.

I tried carbon dosing with kalk saturated vinegar. All was good except my yellow sponge growth took off. It looks like it was growing into the skeleton of my 25 year old ish elegance. I got nervous and stopped dosing.

I might go back to siporax but dunno.

Latest FTS

 

[TheBear78]

...If phosphate has the ability to move in and out of the substrate and find it's own equilibrium, what use is it to try to control it through water changes, carbon dosing, GFO?

Because the level at which it finds equilibrium might not be a good level for a reef system.

 

[gbroadbridge]

When my tank was new I was told the reason I had to dose so much phosphate was bc my rock was soaking it up. Now I'm told it's releasing it into the water column. If phosphate has the ability to move in and out of the substrate and find it's own equilibrium, what use is it to try to control it through water changes, carbon dosing, GFO?

You simply want to maintain appropriate P level for your tank and in many case that means running GFO, not to reduce the level, but to maintain it if the P inputs exceed P outputs.

 

[TWYOUNG]

Because the level at which it finds equilibrium might not be a good level for a reef system.

But according to your theory wouldn't attempting to pull phosphate out of the water column with GFO just lead to more phosphate being pulled out of the substrate to maintain the prior level?

 

[TWYOUNG]

You simply want to maintain appropriate P level for your tank and in many case that means running GFO, not to reduce the level, but to maintain it if the P inputs exceed P outputs.

What if the level is 3.0? I think I'll want to be pulling it out not just maintaining it.

 

[gbroadbridge]

What if the level is 3.0? I think I'll want to be pulling it out not just maintaining it.

I did say the appropriate level, which in my case is 0.05 to 0.08ppm.
If it reaches 0.08ppm in my tank it means it is time to replace the GFO which slowly pulls it back down to 0.05.

If your tank is at 3.0 ppm it would take a long time (think months) to bring it down to whatever level you think appropriate as dropping Phosphate fast is a recipe for disaster.

 

[TWYOUNG]

I did say the appropriate level, which in my case is 0.05 to 0.08ppm.
If it reaches 0.08ppm in my tank it means it is time to replace the GFO which slowly pulls it back down to 0.05.

If your tank is at 3.0 ppm it would take a long time (think months) to bring it down to whatever level you think appropriate as dropping Phosphate fast is a recipe for disaster.

I'm just wondering why, if the theory is correct that phosphate will leach into the circulating water at a certain level, won't trying to lower it below that level just lead to more phosphate leaving the substrate in order to maintain that lower level you've determined you desire. Where's Randy? I'd like to see some experimental evidence of this leaching from rock.

 

[gbroadbridge]

I'm just wondering why, if the theory is correct that phosphate will leach into the circulating water at a certain level, won't trying to lower it below that level just lead to more phosphate leaving the substrate in order to maintain that lower level you've determined you desire. Where's Randy? I'd like to see some experimental evidence of this leaching from rock.

Yes, it will leach from the rock until the phosphate in the water column reaches equilibrium with the level in the carbonate rock reservoir.

This is why you will see a drop in phosphate which then bounces back up, however as you slowly remove phosphate from the rock you are slowly depleting the reservoir reserve, so over time you will lower the overall level of phosphate.

This a reason why it is important to keep phosphate under control, once a high level is stored in the rock it takes a lot of time and media to reduce it.

There have been volumes written about this including by Randy.

https://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

Thanks for the link. Since my level isn't very high, (twenties), and my tank doesn't have any algae issues, I'm willing to be patient and continue with weekly 4ml/day increases unless you'd suggest a different course of action.

Why are you trying to lower it at all?

 

[TWYOUNG]

Why are you trying to lower it at all?

I figure most people have upper limits for their levels above which they take action. I've been led to believe 10/0.1 are the ideal levels so I imagine nitrates in the upper 20's are likely too high. If I'm willing to accept 25, the how about 35, 55, 100. Could 100 be fine if my tank looks okay?

 

[TWYOUNG]

Yes, it will leach from the rock until the phosphate in the water column reaches equilibrium with the level in the carbonate rock reservoir.

This is why you will see a drop in phosphate which then bounces back up, however as you slowly remove phosphate from the rock you are slowly depleting the reservoir reserve, so over time you will lower the overall level of phosphate.

This a reason why it is important to keep phosphate under control, once a high level is stored in the rock it takes a lot of time and media to reduce it.

There have been volumes written about this including by Randy.

https://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php

Thank for the link. Looks like an interesting read.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

I figure most people have upper limits for their levels above which they take action. I've been led to believe 10/0.1 are the ideal levels so I imagine nitrates in the upper 20's are likely too high. If I'm willing to accept 25, the how about 35, 55, 100. Could 100 be fine if my tank looks okay?

Yep. If it ain't broke...

My nutrients have been much higher and the tank thrived. Don't listen to anyone who tells you any specific value is "ideal". Ideal for them? Maybe. But if your corals are happy, then maybe the ideal for you is right where you are.

Don't chase numbers.

 

[TWYOUNG]

Yep. If it ain't broke...

My nutrients have been much higher and the tank thrived. Don't listen to anyone who tells you any specific value is "ideal". Ideal for them? Maybe. But if your corals are happy, then maybe the ideal for you is right where you are.

Don't chase numbers.

Problem is it's really too early for me to know what MY best numbers are. My tank is only 1 1/2 years old and although it's looking good now I lost tons of corals early on, even though I waited months to begin adding them. Three outbreaks of dinoflagellates, likely too much light, possibly too little nutrients, sterile system, maybe all or none of these. I figure the best course of action for now is to aim for what the majority of those before me have been successful with.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

Problem is it's really too early for me to know what MY best numbers are. My tank is only 1 1/2 years old and although it's looking good now I lost tons of corals early on, even though I waited months to begin adding them. Three outbreaks of dinoflagellates, likely too much light, possibly too little nutrients, sterile system, maybe all or none of these. I figure the best course of action for now is to aim for what the majority of those before me have been successful with.

Fair enough, but the reality is, the majority of successful tanks don't have low nutrients. Plenty do, but just as many don't.

 

[fish farmer]

I figure most people have upper limits for their levels above which they take action. I've been led to believe 10/0.1 are the ideal levels so I imagine nitrates in the upper 20's are likely too high. If I'm willing to accept 25, the how about 35, 55, 100. Could 100 be fine if my tank looks okay?

That is almost one of those things that your tank and corals will tell you.

When I had nitrates at 40 and phos at 2 ppm only the strong survived and GHA thrived. My tank actually seemed to do the best at zeros for both, but test kits do error. I felt my rock was the reason for high phos (20 years old), but I did get it down after several months.

Currently I usually have nitrates under 10 with my salifert kit and phos is detectable, usually under 0.1 using a hanna low range. I don't dose n and P, just adjust feeding.